Mainstream Christian and LDS Feminism

This is a basic overview of feminist theological issues. I have a vague memory that I wrote it for a specific purpose, but I don’t remember what. In any case, I found it hiding in the depths of our queue, so I figured that I’d might as well blog it.

Though it’s not my particular specialty, in the course of my studies I’ve encountered a fair amount of Christian feminist theology. As I’ve thought about the various issues raised by feminist theologians, a recurring question for me has been that of to what extent and in what ways these issues are applicable in an LDS context. In comparison to mainstream Christian teachings, how might LDS beliefs either be supportive of, or pose challenges to, feminist ideals? Here I’d like to look at a few distinctive aspects of LDS teachings in this context.

1) The Nature of God

This issue seems like the most logical place to begin, as it deals with what is perhaps the largest difference between LDS and mainstream Christian theology. For traditional Christians, although God is described using gendered language, God is not literally male or female. This, of course, goes along with the belief that God is not corporeal, and is qualitatively different from human beings.

What does this mean for feminists? Since God is not literally male, a strong case can be made for using gender-inclusive language to refer to the divine. (See for example Elizabeth Johnson’s She Who Is.) This is not a completely uncontroversial claim—there are those who argue that Christians should stick to the Biblical image of Father, even if it isn’t meant to be taken literally. However, the crucial point in this context is that a genderless divinity means that it is not too much of a theological leap to describe God with both male and female metaphors.

Latter-day Saints are of course in a rather different position. The assertion that God is literally male precludes this kind of move. In this way, one might see a level of sexism entrenched in LDS teachings that goes beyond that of traditional Christianity—it is not only that God is metaphorically male, but he is understood to be literally so. Maleness is therefore connected to godhood. On the other hand, of course, we also have the notion of Heavenly Mother. In theory, at least, this teaching has tremendous potential for feminism, as femaleness too can be connected to divinity. In practice, however, given the current dearth of information about Heavenly Mother, and the fact the we are forbidden from praying to her, I am tentative to assert too much about the contemporary feminist value of this particular doctrine.

2) View of Eve

This, I think, is one of the most ambiguous elements of LDS teachings. In the history of Christian thought, there has been much emphasis on Eve’s role in bringing about the downfall of humanity—as the author of 1 Timothy explains, “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” (2:14) This story has frequently been used as evidence of female inferiority and greater vulnerability to sin, and as justification for female subordination.

In contemporary Christian theology, however, my observation is that this issue has become rather muted, as few approach the Fall in literal terms, and the gendered aspects of it rarely come up in current theological work on the meaning of original sin. It is nonetheless the case that feminists must grapple with passages like Genesis 3:16 (“they desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee”) and with the New Testament commentary on Genesis which subordinates women. Christian feminists generally reject such passages, but they are posed with the challenge of how to make such a move without rejecting the validity of the Bible entirely.

What is the LDS approach to this? On the one hand, we interpret the Fall as a positive and even necessary thing. In this context, it is possible to see Eve as a heroine, rather than a villain. A positive view of Eve is reinforced by her appearance in D&C 138, in which she is listed as being “among the mighty and great ones” in Joseph F. Smith’s vision of the spirit world.

Strikingly, however, this does not translate into a rejection of the sentiment of Genesis 3:16, or of female subordination. On the one hand, Eve makes what is seen as the correct decision—on the other, she still seems to be punished for it (though one line of argument sees this not so much as punishment, but as the inevitable consequence of falling into mortality). The feminist potential of the LDS version of the Adam and Eve story thus remains somewhat ambiguous, particularly given that ritual female subordination is still connected to it.

3) Gender as Eternal. The Proclamation on the Family asserts that “gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” For those who advocate what it sometimes called “difference feminism,” which emphasizes the differences between men and women and the need to value them equally, this teaching clearly has much potential. Those who are way of gender essentialism, on the other hand, are likely to see this as potentially problematic. Mainstream Christians who are unhappy with gender roles in this life might still hope to be liberated from them in the next; even Augustine, for all his blatant sexism, thought that gender inequality would be overcome in the world to come. LDS feminists who are less than thrilled about their divine gender role, on the other hand, are faced with an eternity of it.

4) Lay Priesthood (and Church Practice)

The question of female ordination is in many ways a very different question in an LDS context, because of the LDS lay priesthood. For women in Catholic, Orthodox, and those Protestant traditions that restrict the priesthood to men, this restriction means that a particular path in life is closed to them, even if they feel strongly called to such a vocation. It also means that their churches are run by men, and female voices do not have the same level of input.

This last concern is true of LDS women as well. But not being ordained in an LDS context means something quite different. It is not only that particular church offices are exclusively held by men—it is that every male over the age of 12 is given access to the power of God in a way that women are not. Priesthood for Latter-day Saints, I would argue, is far more closely tied to gender than in mainstream Christianity as a whole. It is not simply one option for males. It is linked to being male.

On the other hand, it is worth noting that the lay structure of LDS congregations at the local level means that women have multiple opportunities to participate in leadership callings. In addition, they can speak in meetings and teach classes which include men.

5) Polygamy

I don’t want to discuss this at length—I’ll  only make the obvious point that this challenge exists for LDS feminists in a way quite unlike their compatriots in other Christian churches. Polygamy is not only the past; it is, at least, potentially the future as well, as no one knows if it will show up again in the next life.

6) Additional Scripture and Continuing Revelation

What effects do our additional scripture have? The Book of Mormon presents far fewer female role models than the Bible; in fact, women are all but invisible. The Doctrine & Covenants is not much better. It does give us section 25, a direct revelation to a woman. But we also have to grapple with 132, a revelation which lays out the rules for polygamy and fairly blatantly describes women as property. And this becomes even more challenging because we cannot explain it in terms of cultural distance, as is often done with the Bible.

One the other hand, the notion of continuing revelation is potentially liberating, in that it gives members of the LDS church a reason to feel less bound to particular sexist statements in the Bible. It is worth noting that the although the FamProc reinforces gender roles, it also explicitly states that men and women are admonished to be “equal partners.” And continuing revelation opens up the possibility of radical change.

In sum, I see both obstacles to and unrealized potential in LDS doctrine for feminist theology. And despite the challenges, I appreciate the resources that exist both in and outside of our tradition which can contribute to that work.